§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY,in asking the Lord President what course the Government intended to take with reference to those schemes of the Endowed School Commissioners which had not lain for 40 days on the Table of the House at the time of the Prorogation, said, some difference of opinion existed as to the fate of these schemes. One opinion was that if they had been laid upon the Table of the House, even on the last day of the Session, the 40 days would run on during the Recess; the second, that what was left uncompleted of the 40 days during last Session would be completed during the present Session; and the third was that the prorogation in this, as in all other cases, put an entire end to the action of Parliament. He wished to impress on his noble Friend the danger of being entirely guided by the opinion of the Law Officers of the Crown, unless that opinion was supported by some decision. He was willing to allow that the Law Officers were as nearly as possible infallible; still they were not always so, and. if they should prove to be so in this instance the result would be very serious in cases of large transfers of property. He trusted, therefore, that his noble Friend would take the safe course of allowing these schemes to lie upon the Table during 40 days of the present Session.
§ THE MARQUESS OF RIPONsaid, that as the end of last Session approached, his right hon. Friend (Mr. Forster) and himself felt bound to take no course which could deprive Parliament of jurisdiction in this matter, and so, after a certain day, they allowed no schemes to be laid upon the Table. The last schemes submitted to Parliament were submitted on the 4th of July, and the schemes presented on that day at the prorogation of Parliament had still three days to run. The opinion of the Law Officers was that the 40 days did not run out during the Recess, but that what was necessary to complete the term of 40 days might be made up this Session. It was also held to be absolutely the duty of the Education Department to submit these schemes to the first Council held after the term of 40 days had been completed, and that the Act of 367 Parliament left them no discretion in the matter.
§ LORD REDESDALEwished to know whether it was quite certain a further period could not be allowed?
§ THE MARQUESS OF RIPONsaid, that the Government had the power of rejecting any scheme previous to its being laid before Parliament. Any scheme recommended by the Commissioners came before the Education Department in the first instance, before it was laid on the Table of either House of Parliament. After a scheme under the Act had been laid on the Table of both Houses, if no Address were moved within 40 days it was proper to submit it to Her Majesty, and for the Government to advise Her Majesty to ratify it.
§ LORD REDESDALEthought there must be a discretion. There was nothing in the Act requiring the assent to be given at the first Council held after the 40 days had expired; and he should think that no reasonable objection could be taken to a moderate extension of time under the peculiar circumstances of the case. If a dissolution had taken place in the meantime, he supposed that 40 days must have been allowed to the new Parliament.
§ THE MARQUESS OF RIPONfeared that the scheme would fall to the ground if a further interval of time elapsed.
§ THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYhoped that the opinion of the Law Officers of the Crown had been taken on this point.
§ THE MARQUESS OF RIPONsaid, that the course pursued by the Education Department had been strictly Parliamentary and regular.
§ House adjourned at Eight o'clock, 'till To-morrow, half past Ten o'clock.